Reorder the slides of a Rootr presentation

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

The annotations indicate a non-destructive mutation (readOnlyHint=false, destructiveHint=false). The description adds that it reorders slides, which is consistent but does not disclose further behavioral traits like permissions needed or error handling. The additional detail about requiring a full list adds some value.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

The description is two sentences, front-loaded with the action, and contains no unnecessary words. Every sentence earns its place.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

While the description covers the main usage, it omits what the tool returns (no output schema) and does not address error cases or permissions. Given the tool's mutation nature, additional context would improve completeness.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The input schema already describes parameters, but the description adds crucial context: 'order must be the FULL list of the deck's slide ids, in the new desired order' and advises to read the presentation first. This significantly clarifies the parameter meaning beyond the schema.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the action ('Reorder') and the resource ('slides of a Rootr presentation'). It distinguishes from sibling tools like rootr_update_presentation_slide and rootr_append_presentation_slides, which have different purposes.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description explicitly instructs to call rootr_read_presentation first to get current slide ids, providing clear context for correct usage. However, it does not mention when not to use this tool or alternative approaches.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.